Re: Balsa and IMAP (again)

[Peter Bloomfield <bloomfld eos ncsu edu>]

On 2001.07.14 14:48 M . Thielker wrote:
> Hi,
> 

[snip]

> - Some people have added rudimentary support for listing IMAP trees in
>   Balsa, but I am still missing a folder type that can contain messages
>   as well as subfolders.

Sound like my patch! `Rudimentary' is probably a fair description: `in an
early stage of development.' I'm very interested in seeing Balsa get first
class IMAP support, and I'm sure that will take quite a few stages of
development.

As far as mixed folders go, what exactly are you looking for? Here's a
screenshot of Balsa 1.1.7 with my IMAP tree open: notice that INBOX has
subfolders, and is open with messages in it. In what way does that not meet
your needs? Or does Balsa not look like this when you access your server? 
(I know there are other servers than Cyrus...)

>   There should really be no distinction between
>   an IMAP folder and an IMAP mailbox in the mailbox tree.

You're right, the IMAP docs use `folder' and `mailbox' indiscriminately.
However, you can have one with the \Noselect flag, which can hold only
subfolders and not messages, and the best way to represent that in a Balsa
tree seems to be as a folder (i.e., an mbnode with no mailbox). That's what
the current code does.

>   At least the
>   server doesn't make one, why should we? In order to fully utilize
>   such a folder, I now must enter it into the tree twice: once as an
>   IMAP mailbox and once as an IMAP folder.

As you can see, I don't have to...

>   The former allows me to see
>   the messages in the folder while the latter shows the subfolders and
>   the messages contained in them.

...but others have reported a bug in which the tree is shown but with zero
message counts in all mailboxes--traced to libmutt code, iirc. However,
that doesn't sound exactly like your situation: subfolders with messages,
but no messages in the parent folder.

I'm really interested in finding out how our experiences differ!

Peter

balsa-shot.jpg